Yeah, NJO is schismatic still and just in terms of production putting out an 18 book series was probably not a good idea in hindsight.

Totally agree though, I'll trade in 18 books by Denning, Traviss, and Alston for one Stover.

I'm confused about the idea of no Imperial remnant after Empire's End. That was established at the end of the Last Command, which predated Empire's end in real time and in universe. It wasn't contradicted by those later stories in that they only dealt with the Empire in the core, and didn't say anything about Pellaeon and the outer territories. Unless I'm missing something here?

That's my point. Those are retcons. It's a huge continuity error that was "fixed" through retconning that there was this Imperial territory all along. But there was no Outer Territories Empire in early literature. It doesn't appear until Specter of the Past. Ambush at Corellia says in no uncertain terms that the Empire is gone. There's Imperial sympathizers that want to bring it back like Hethrir or the Ismarens, but there's no actual Empire for them to lead, which is why they don't have anything of that sort.

I'm not sure what you mean by The Last Command. There's some Imperial forces left at the end of it, but it's presumed that they were under Palpatine in Dark Empire. A lot of stuff goes on off-screen in Dark Empire, because by the time the story starts, the Imperial factions have split into civil war themselves, which Palpatine encouraged in his insanity. I believe that's where KJA got the idea of these warring naval officers in the Deep Core fighting over uninhabited worlds. That's where Palpatine's empire emanated from in Dark Empire, and by the time of Darksaber that's all that was left. And Daala killed all those guys and basically seemed to wreck whatever they had left through incompetence, and after Darksaber the Empire does not appear again until Specter of the Past.

As for the NJO, I think the problem that the series had in terms of length was toward the end. The Force Heretic trilogy and The Final Prophecy, four of the final five novels, are complete filler. If Traitor and Destiny's Way fed into a condensed version of those four novels that was good, followed by The Unifying Force, it would have ended pretty darn good IMO. And it would have been reduced from 19 to 16 (I think you're skipping one when you count 18).

Last edited by Crash Override on Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:18 am; edited 1 time in total

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:18 am

Message

Caedus_16Master

Joined: 15 Apr 2008Posts: 4843Location: Korriban

Crash Override wrote:

Maybe in the middle it drags a bit, Balance Point through Dark Journey are kind of eh.

While I don't like the idea of Anakin dying (still not over it) Star by Star was anything but 'eh'.

I actually enjoyed the Edge of Victory duology as well. But Balance Point and of course Dark Journey I did actually find 'eh'._________________Perfection is a lifelong pursuit requiring sacrifice. The only way to get it quicker is to sacrifice the most.

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:22 am

Message

Crash OverrideMaster

Joined: 22 Dec 2010Posts: 1962

Caedus_16 wrote:

Crash Override wrote:

Maybe in the middle it drags a bit, Balance Point through Dark Journey are kind of eh.

While I don't like the idea of Anakin dying (still not over it) Star by Star was anything but 'eh'.

I actually enjoyed the Edge of Victory duology as well. But Balance Point and of course Dark Journey I did actually find 'eh'.

Whoops, I just edited out what you replied to while OBSESSIVELY editing my post (because I agreed it wasn't wholly accurate). I thought Star by Star dragged on a bit too long, but it had some of the best written individual scenes in the series. I have issues with Edge of Victory from a planning standpoint. The books themselves are good and I like Greg Keyes, but I think it was poor planning for the 'uberplot' to devote this duology to Anakin Solo, essentially, and then kill him off. I think they alienated the readers from the intended principal protagonist by focusing on Anakin, and consequently people didn't accept Jacen as the protagonist after the fact.

Plus there's the whole thematic/conflict/character arc component to what they did between Anakin and Jacen, and I guess the readers seemed to respond better to what they did with Anakin at the expense of Jacen's arc, which was the fulcrum of the series thematically. And Anakin did get more "screen time" before Star by Star.

AAGHH ANOTHER EDIT

Also I found the basic premise to Star by Star to be stretching my suspension of disbelief, that Luke can't go on this mission because he's too well recognized as the leader, but that this creates the false dichotomy that because Luke can't do it, ONLY THE SOLO CHILDREN AND THEIR PEER GROUP CAN! Nobody call Corran Horn or Kyle Katarn or someone not as visible as Luke but similarly capable. And then Ganner is the DECOY LEADER so Anakin the 16 year old boy can lead this mission of children mostly older than him, despite the fact that his impulsiveness really does tend to show that he isn't quite as mature as the others. It's just all rather too unrealistically constructed in a way that's beneficial to the author's plot, rather than characters behaving the way that the characters should realistically behave and the plot flowing from that. And that's a problem that has plagued Dark Nest-LOTF-FOTJ, so I think it's just the way that Denning plots his books, and I am not a fan.

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 1:52 am

Message

Dog-Poop_WalkerMaster

Joined: 28 Jan 2012Posts: 1169Location: Deserts without mirages

Crash Override wrote:

That's my point. Those are retcons. It's a huge continuity error that was "fixed" through retconning that there was this Imperial territory all along. But there was no Outer Territories Empire in early literature. It doesn't appear until Specter of the Past. Ambush at Corellia says in no uncertain terms that the Empire is gone. There's Imperial sympathizers that want to bring it back like Hethrir or the Ismarens, but there's no actual Empire for them to lead, which is why they don't have anything of that sort.

I'm not sure what you mean by The Last Command. There's some Imperial forces left at the end of it, but it's presumed that they were under Palpatine in Dark Empire.

I don't have the book on hand, but here's an excerpt from wookiepedia's The Last Command plot summary:

Quote:

...Captain Pellaeon, aware that without the Grand Admiral's tactical brilliance the Imperial forces have effectively lost the battle, orders a withdrawal. With Pellaeon ordering all remaining Imperial forces in the Bilbringi system to retreat the Thrawn campaign is over with a triumph of the New Republic.

While it doesn't explicitly say that there were Imperial forces and official territories in the Outer Rim it is clearly established that Thrawn at least had operations there. I don't think that is beyond the scope of the narrative.

The qoute you posted merely established that the New Republic wasn't aware of the existence of Imperial Forces, but I don't see that as a clear indicator that there factually was not. The text certainly does not say that Pallaeon was killed in Dark Empire or afterwards, so I don't think it's a retcon for Zahn to bring him back.

It may be a clear difference of vision between Zahn and KJA, but I'm just not sure that it is a continuity error within the storyline._________________Unsure whether it was desire or despair that kept me drawing breath. When all my dreams came down to nothing, left me just another piece of meat. For you I carried my life on in my teeth. Through betrayed years and bloody tears, and pits where you can only crawl. Poor Grendel's had an accident... So may you all.

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 7:26 am

Message

Crash OverrideMaster

Joined: 22 Dec 2010Posts: 1962

And that quote from Ambush at Corellia established that by 18 ABY the New Republic had taken back that territory because it explicitly says there are no Imperial remnants left. It doesn't matter that it used to a exist, the book says that nine years later it no longer exists. It's a continuity error.

The New Republic was aware of the Imperial remnant in Hand of Thrawn, otherwise they would have no reason to make a peace treaty.

Edit: let me rephrase this so I don't come off as a horrible monster. When I say there's no outer rim empire remnant in early literature, i mean as of 18 ABY and before 1997 when Zahn retconned it. In Darksaber, Pellaeon is in the deep core with the rest of the Imperials because that's all that is left. If there's a misunderstanding, it was between Zahn and canon, because even if KJA changed something his stories take place after Zahn's and were written after Zahn's, and there's no Z-canon. My purpose in bringing up the other books besides Ambush at Corellia was just to demonstrate that the Empire ceased to be a villain as an entity because it was commonly understood to be gone in the canon, explicitly stated to be so in Ambush.

But Zahn retconned it so that's obviously not true after 1997, but it was true before he did. The same could be said about miscellaneous other continuity errors that were retconned. But just because it was retconned doesn't meant it wasn't an error beforehand.

There's a similar massive continuity flub with the Empire of the Hand. I think people tend to give Zahn a pass when it comes to continuity. Not that the EotH thing was his fault. But he did do the Chak Fel thing that disenfranchised me originally.

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 4:36 pm

Message

DarthMRNKnight

Joined: 20 Jul 2011Posts: 331

It is important to remember that most communication is implied, not explicit. Which is extra important in literary works where the author's very job is to use language in a masterful, artistic manner, where interpretation of implications become necessary. For continuity purposes, this means that the contradiction of an implication easily qualifies as an error requiring retcon. It does not have to be explicit to fit the discrepancy label.

To whatever extent it does, that is a development born from too loose EU continuity, where the constant need for mental retcons and rationalizations have forced us to collectively only consider something a discrepancy if it definitely and explicitly contradicts something else._________________I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.

Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 2:50 pm

Message

Arawn_FennKnight

Joined: 07 Apr 2011Posts: 239Location: Damn you Shonda Rhimes!!!

DarthMRN wrote:

Were I less informed, I might have included Rostoni in that equation since she worked as an editor alongside him in the same company, under benefit of the doubt.

There is no great mystery here. You ignore Rostoni because Rostoni contradicted you. When you foolishly attempt to throw reality under the bus in such a fashion, this kind of thing will inevitably tend to happen. Let's not forget, your original excuse for ignoring her comments was that you assumed they were from before the creation of the all-powerful "Holocron" ( a position itself predicated on the knowingly false assumption that the Holocron represented a change in canon policy ). Then it was proved that she took the same position after the creation of the all-powerful Holocron. Since the old excuse doesn't work anymore, it's simply been discarded in favor of a new excuse, one which unsurprisingly resorts to attacking Rostoni.

DarthMRN wrote:

But I frequented her thread on the SW.com boards for a long time. Enough to discover that not only were her area of expertise different, related to covers, text editing, schedules, contracts and the like, she also betrayed ignorance of bits and pieces of Holocron continuity Leland had revealed in the past.

So what? The point is that she spoke openly of the canon hierarchy, and after the all-important cutoff date you invented in the process of constructing this fictive reality in which you insist on dwelling. By what sleight of hand do you intend to magically convert ignorance of "bits and pieces" into a denigration of the canon hierarchy itself? And whatever happened to the famous "Leland edits the EU" stance?

DarthMRN wrote:

given how you think it is canon.

So its canonicity is now a matter of opinion? I thought there was a canon level system. Surely this system includes the book somewhere in one of its many levels?

DarthMRN wrote:

Palp beat Yoda who canonically is the more powerful.

Not according to Lucas. What kind of "canon" do you think you've invented here? Something which gets rid of Lucas entirely? Whatever that is, it isn't "canon".

DarthMRN wrote:

Rendering that continuity an illusion, only marginally valid until a new film comes along to violate it, bringing its own host of EU tie-ins with it.

Read that again. Until a new film comes along to violate it. Sound familiar? We've been there before. Why is this time any different?

DarthMRN wrote:

Post-Holocon we had ten glorious years where the EU actually needed to be coherent, where old material got to constrain the new.

Except when it didn't. Over in the real world, in most cases the authors did pretty much what they wanted. During this epic period, this fictional Golden Age, it was commonplace to find books contradicting one another on a variety of plot points, including such small matters as the fundamental structure of the universe.

DarthMRN wrote:

We had reason to believe in the continuity illusion.

That's all this story is. Illusion. Fantasy. Trickery. Not anything which really happened.

DarthMRN wrote:

Overlords are new and different...within SW, as if you didn't know that.

Just because something is new doesn't necessarily make it "different" in a meaningful sense. In terms of the characterization of the Son and the implied threat to the normal galaxy, the Son is not fundamentally different from any unusually powerful Sith we might encounter. Perhaps there could be a question of degree of power levels, but since we haven't seen Wielders operating outside of Mortis even that much is not clear. And given that the Wielders have been alleged to be ascended Celestials in FOTJ, they are really not as "new" as some might want to think. There is certainly no indication of "divinity", in the true sense of the term, either in the episodes themselves or in EU references. Unless we're saying that any beings who have merged with the Force, such as Force ghosts, are also "divinities". The Celestials do not seem to be, from what we know about them. And the backstory told by the Father creates a different impression entirely._________________Hir yw'r dydd a hir yw'r nos, a hir yw aros Arawn.

Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 10:20 pm

Message

DarthMRNKnight

Joined: 20 Jul 2011Posts: 331

Arawn_Fenn wrote:

DarthMRN wrote:

Were I less informed, I might have included Rostoni in that equation since she worked as an editor alongside him in the same company, under benefit of the doubt.

There is no great mystery here. You ignore Rostoni because Rostoni contradicted you.

When are you going to learn that I am beyond your rethoric? Seeing through and curbstomping stuff like this is one of my big skills in life.

This line of discussion was about whether Lucas mattered towards EU canon. You are referring to a post-Holocron statement by Rostoni that according to you validates his authoritativeness. One you in spite of several prompts, have neglected to provide. So you are in no position to assume it as established fact. That said, I think I know what you are talking about, and it was a generality by her that Leland has provided a specific exception to.

Though until you have the guts to quote and source this information of yours, that is neither here nor there, and not something I can really respond to. In the meantime, though, you are quite powerless to use it as an argument against me. Horse before cart.

I'll leave you with a few little nuggets to chew on -that are actually on-point- anyway:

Timothy Zahn wrote:

As far as I know, George Lucas himself is not involved. He has a liaison group that deals with the book people, the game people, etc. They do the day-to-day work. Occasionally, he will be asked a question and will give an answer.
As far as I know, he has not read any of the novels.

Shelly Shapiro wrote:

I would characterize [George Lucas'] role as limited but important. He’s the one who said the alien invaders could not be dark side Force-users, that we couldn’t kill Luke, that we had to kill Anakin instead of Jacen (we had originally planned it the other way around). Other than that, he occasionally answered some basic questions for us, but that was rare. Mostly he leaves the books to his licensing people, trusting them to get it right.

Quote:

Let's not forget, your original excuse for ignoring her comments was that you assumed they were from before the creation of the all-powerful "Holocron" ( a position itself predicated on the knowingly false assumption that the Holocron represented a change in canon policy ).

That "excuse" is a pretty good one too, for it is quite a different beast, this post-Holocron EU canon.

DarthMRN and Leland Chee wrote:

When was the actual cutoff point between "older stuff that may or may not fit", and modern continuity testing?
There wasn't really a cutoff point. When I started the Holocron, there were various folks who had differing opinions on what was and wasn't part of the official continuity. Anything whose continuity was in question was initially designated as S-continuity, including the Marvel comics, the WEG RPG, junior novels, video games, the newspaper strip comics; pretty much anything in the EU that wasn't an adult novel, a current comic series, or a non-fiction title (ie The Guide to the Star Wars Universe, the Encyclopedia, the DK books, and the Essential Guides).

Remember S-canon? That "take it or leave it, completely optional" canon level? Yeah, when Leland came into the picture in late 1999-early 2000, different people had different ideas, and his solution was to render massive amounts of existing EU garbage canon. That right there is as clear an illustration of the difference of pre and post-Holocron continuity as you are likely to get.

Quote:

Then it was proved that she took the same position after the creation of the all-powerful Holocron.

And by "proved" you mean "Simon Said by Arawn", I see. Since I'm still not sure what quote we are even talking about. And you have never sourced a quote for as long as I have known you, so chances are you neither have nor will "prove" this either.

Quote:

By what sleight of hand do you intend to magically convert ignorance of "bits and pieces" into a denigration of the canon hierarchy itself?

I'm not even sure what you are asking here. Is this in reference to this "long-established canon hierarchy" that you are convinced exists beyond doubt or need of evidence? Cause it still isn't. If you are actually going somewhere of substance with this, you need to clearly state what exactly you are on about. What sort of canon hierarchy are we talking about, and why do you believe in it?

Quote:

And whatever happened to the famous "Leland edits the EU" stance?

He does. I have demonstrated it. What of it?

Quote:

So its canonicity is now a matter of opinion? I thought there was a canon level system. Surely this system includes the book somewhere in one of its many levels?

The ROTS adult novelization? Yeah, it does. In four different levels as best I can tell. I thought you would have remembered since I tried repeatedly to beat its placement into your skull at one point, even using multi-colored fonts to attract your attention. It was while I was still young and naive, and thought if I just stated my case clearly and repeatedly, you might actually acknowledge it.

The answer is the same today: Stuff in them that came from GL are G-canon. Individual elements created by the author are C-canon. Events and descriptions are S-canon. Stuff that contradicts the movies are non-continuity.

What that means is that almost everything contained in that novel, or any movie novel for that matter, which is different from the movies they elaborate on, are S-canon. Optional, take it or leave it, not canon in any meaningful sense -canon. Your disregard for this is what makes it your opinion, and a wrong opinion IMO.

Quote:

DarthMRN wrote:

Palp beat Yoda who canonically is the more powerful.

Not according to Lucas. What kind of "canon" do you think you've invented here? Something which gets rid of Lucas entirely? Whatever that is, it isn't "canon".

That would be EU canon. Which contrary to your strawmen does not get rid of Lucas entirely, merely relegates him to the fundamentals, nothing more.

Incidentally, where does Lucas give a clear answer about who is more powerful of Yoda and Palp?
If he figured Yoda to be more powerful, shouldn't he have reflected that in the movie somehow? Having Palp be the one to flee and let legions of clones drive Yoda away would certainly have been viable, and perfectly in character for Palp. But chances are GL figured he ought to show why Yoda just sat on Dagobah for decades rather than go fight the Emperor, which the current fight does adequately.

Quote:

Read that again. Until a new film comes along to violate it. Sound familiar? We've been there before. Why is this time any different?

I mentioned ten glorious years of Holocron continuity. The Holocron was established in connection with the PT, and per above, it cleaned house with the dreg left over after the OT EU. After RotS GL said he was done, so we had no reason to expect further meddling from his end. Which lasted until TCW, which was the beginning of an end Disney seems poised to finish.

In this timespan EU works were only recognized as canon if they had been subjected to multi-stage continuity testing. Canon was still primarily author-driven and based on retcons, but it was the best it had ever been. Anecdotal evidence suggests the Rostoni era of canon consisted of yelling down the hall if someone knew the answer to a creator's question when they called.
And as far as I can tell the difference is clear enough. I don't recall any significant continuity errors that weren't either A) caused by Lucas or B) not errors after all because they represented contradictions of S-canon.

Remember the JvS vs PoD debacle? If the state of Holocron continuity was as bad as you paint it, a mere rewrite of chronology and editing of details would not have faced the outcry it did. That whole Mando thing started with S-canon Marvel stories that never had any guarantee of being upheld under the Holocron paradigm. So I don't know what sort of lackluster canon you are talking about. It has been mostly small stuff as far as I have seen.

Quote:

Just because something is new doesn't necessarily make it "different" in a meaningful sense. In terms of the characterization of the Son and the implied threat to the normal galaxy, the Son is not fundamentally different from any unusually powerful Sith we might encounter. Perhaps there could be a question of degree of power levels, but since we haven't seen Wielders operating outside of Mortis even that much is not clear. And given that the Wielders have been alleged to be ascended Celestials in FOTJ, they are really not as "new" as some might want to think. There is certainly no indication of "divinity", in the true sense of the term, either in the episodes themselves or in EU references. Unless we're saying that any beings who have merged with the Force, such as Force ghosts, are also "divinities". The Celestials do not seem to be, from what we know about them. And the backstory told by the Father creates a different impression entirely.

Nice try. Pulling back the lens so as to only look at the abstract does not answer a claim that the Overlords has a new and unique Force quality. And no, what they do is not comparable in any way to what Force Ghosts have._________________I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.

Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:48 am

Message

Arawn_FennKnight

Joined: 07 Apr 2011Posts: 239Location: Damn you Shonda Rhimes!!!

DarthMRN wrote:

One you in spite of several prompts, have neglected to provide.

DarthMRN wrote:

And you have never sourced a quote for as long as I have known you, so chances are you neither have nor will "prove" this either.

Now you're just lying. You know as well as I do that the quote was posted on a forum which no longer exists. If history is any indication, if posted here you'll simply ignore it and just use some other tactic. So asking to see it over and over again is nothing more than the usual game-playing and stalling. As revealed below you know it exists.

DarthMRN wrote:

That said, I think I know what you are talking about, and it was a generality by her that Leland has provided a specific exception to.

While curiously not being able to provide any specific examples of this in practice. It is not a question of exceptions. To characterize it as such, one would have to throw out the basis of the whole concept.

DarthMRN wrote:

Anything whose continuity was in question was initially designated as S-continuity, including the Marvel comics, the WEG RPG, junior novels, video games, the newspaper strip comics

Now what do all of these things have in common, I wonder?

DarthMRN wrote:

Is this in reference to this "long-established canon hierarchy" that you are convinced exists beyond doubt or need of evidence? Cause it still isn't.

You've seen the evidence. You pretend not to have seen it in one place while admitting its existence in another. What is imaginary is "Leland canon". You know this as well, because at other times you've talked about what the Holocron really is.

DarthMRN wrote:

He does. I have demonstrated it. What of it?

You just claimed that things like editing were Rostoni's responsibility, not Leland's, in a ploy to render her statements invalid on topics you believe to be "Leland territory". But now we're back to "Leland is the editor" again? In what way is this supposed to be a description of reality? Leland does not edit EU sources. ( If he did, he'd be responsible for all the errors that have appeared in the last ten years, which wouldn't make "Leland canon" look very coherent or useful. )

DarthMRN wrote:

What that means is that almost everything contained in that novel, or any movie novel for that matter, which is different from the movies they elaborate on, are S-canon. Optional, take it or leave it, not canon in any meaningful sense -canon. Your disregard for this is what makes it your opinion, and a wrong opinion IMO.

In case you forget, you were the one citing the novel in your argument.

DarthMRN wrote:

If he figured Yoda to be more powerful, shouldn't he have reflected that in the movie somehow?

In other words, Lucas can say nothing, unless it is "reflected in the movie somehow". Which we might call getting rid of Lucas himself entirely. As far as reflection in the movie is concerned, Yoda has something like 800 years more experience than Palpatine, yet is still defeated.

DarthMRN wrote:

After RotS GL said he was done, so we had no reason to expect further meddling from his end.

Like now. So why is now any different?

Quote:

As far as I know, he has not read any of the novels.

As far as he knows.

DarthMRN wrote:

And no, what they do is not comparable in any way to what Force Ghosts have.

The Plagueis novel describes them as having "merged themselves with the Force". We may note that this is the same wording used to describe Force ghosting in the ROTS script.

There aren't that many options here. They may influence the balance of the Force; they may be influenced by the balance of the Force. Neither of these possibilities is really anything new. Plagueis and Sidious influenced the balance of the Force; the Jedi in the PT were influenced by the balance of the Force._________________Hir yw'r dydd a hir yw'r nos, a hir yw aros Arawn.

Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:50 pm

Message

DarthMRNKnight

Joined: 20 Jul 2011Posts: 331

Arawn_Fenn wrote:

Now you're just lying. You know as well as I do that the quote was posted on a forum which no longer exists. If history is any indication, if posted here you'll simply ignore it and just use some other tactic. So asking to see it over and over again is nothing more than the usual game-playing and stalling. As revealed below you know it exists.

I couldn't do this even if I wanted to, for the majority of my information on the topic comes from the same forum. I can no longer link to my source any more than you can. But I can dig up the quote and tell you I where I found it. I expect no more or less from you.

Since the quote in question is the one I thought it was, that makes things easier, though. At least for me, for I remember you posting it, and me contradicting it with a Leland quote. But since I remember neither what exactly Rostoni said, not what Leland said in contest, that is as far as this topic can be discussed. If you are really interested, you can search through this site and see if you find it. I imagine you'll find it enlightening in any case. If you do, so I know what it says exactly, I'll see about answering it again.

As for lying, while I admit that you have in the past told me generally where to find your quotes, you have never given the sort of information that would enable me to find the quote without combing though the source myself, which isn't always easy. Such as telling me a single line comes from a novel several hundred pages long without telling me what page or chapter. That stuff isn't good enough if you want to be acknowledged as having cited your claims.

Quote:

While curiously not being able to provide any specific examples of this in practice. It is not a question of exceptions. To characterize it as such, one would have to throw out the basis of the whole concept.

Why? You can't just say this with no further elaboration. A generality is a generality, it applies most of the time, but not all the time. Exceptions are exceptions, they go against the general rule.

Quote:

DarthMRN wrote:

Anything whose continuity was in question was initially designated as S-continuity, including the Marvel comics, the WEG RPG, junior novels, video games, the newspaper strip comics

Now what do all of these things have in common, I wonder?

They were released prior to Holocron testing, and presumably deemed less serious and worse integrated than the reference material and adult novels that were retained in spite of their age. I also assume there was an economic concern involved, since newer comic series and such were deemed continuity while older weren't. It wouldn't do to decanonize current sellers, even if the logic used on older works applied to them too.

About what one would expect, in other words.

Quote:

You've seen the evidence. You pretend not to have seen it in one place while admitting its existence in another. What is imaginary is "Leland canon". You know this as well, because at other times you've talked about what the Holocron really is.

Maybe I have seen it. But given the length of time we are discussing over, you could do with reminding me what exactly you are basing yourself on, since we are covering a rather wide range of topics.

I don't understand what is so hard about recognizing shades of gray rather than rigid absolutes. The Holocon does tracking first, cohesion second. Creators and their retcons are the primarily means of EU continuity. But that doesn't mean Leland doesn't check over things before release and makes small edits where he can. It just means he doesn't have the power to hold back a product even if it is in violation. That would cost money, and SW is above all a money-making machine. So instead he just makes a note of stuff that cannot be changed easily, with a plan to have someone else retcon it afterwards.

Where his and other editors big continuity contribution comes in is in the multi-stage testing during production. The initial idea has to be approved, and a few times during production things are checked again, roughly and abstractly I assume. Plus the creators calls and asks questions. And then a finished product lands on his desk, and he has to look through it for real. By that point the big errors will have been avoided, but little stuff that only an EU loremaster would notice still creeps in rather easily. And Leland is the chief of EU loremasters, so whatever fans notice, we can be sure he does too. He just doesn't have the authority to stop the production schedule even if he finds something objectionable.

Quote:

Leland does not edit EU sources. ( If he did, he'd be responsible for all the errors that have appeared in the last ten years, which wouldn't make "Leland canon" look very coherent or useful. )

Leland Chee wrote:

How much of the continuity do you write or rewrite?
Authors and editors often ask for suggestions on an existing planet, species, or character to use or to see what can and can't be done with a certain character. When going through approvals, I'll make small changes as necessary to make things fits within continuity. I'm often asked to be involved in the early concept discussions for new stories. When continuity conflicts arise, I may make note of the issue in Holocron and come up with a couple of potential explanations which may or may not be considered in the future. Sometimes we'll create names as needed. Beyond that, we leave the actual writing to the authors.

As for its usefulness, I generally agree. When I first discovered this, it almost broke my EU fandom. It set the stage for my current lack of interest in the EU.

...and still it was miles above anything that came before. That makes it relatively good, if not satisfactory. Ironically, the final nail for my part came not from this, but from Leland's further powerlessness to do anything about GL.

Quote:

In case you forget, you were the one citing the novel in your argument.

If you say so. If I did, I assume I also said it was a part of the novel I expected to have come from Lucas. And since we are discussing its canonicity right now, I expect I also said I found the source to be unreliable to begin with so YMMV.

Quote:

In other words, Lucas can say nothing, unless it is "reflected in the movie somehow". Which we might call getting rid of Lucas himself entirely. As far as reflection in the movie is concerned, Yoda has something like 800 years more experience than Palpatine, yet is still defeated.

So no quote from Lucas forthcoming? And still you call me liar for saying you never source your claims.

I acknowledge your point, though. Given GL's filmmaking skills, I guess it would be unreasonable to expect his intention to be reflected in the work. All I can say is that is "should" have been.
And yeah, Yoda has every rational reason to be better. So why indeed would Lucas let Palp even have a fighting chance in the movie? I guess because SW is supposed to be mindless pulp driven by the rule of cool and rule of drama. Realism can get stuffed.

Quote:

DarthMRN wrote:

After RotS GL said he was done, so we had no reason to expect further meddling from his end.

Like now. So why is now any different?

I don't understand the question. GL, the one person in the Lucas empire with power to disregard the EU however he pleased, saying he is signing off for good. Personally I think that carries a certain significance when it comes to whether to take EU continuity seriously or not.

Quote:

The Plagueis novel describes them as having "merged themselves with the Force". We may note that this is the same wording used to describe Force ghosting in the ROTS script.

There aren't that many options here. They may influence the balance of the Force; they may be influenced by the balance of the Force. Neither of these possibilities is really anything new. Plagueis and Sidious influenced the balance of the Force; the Jedi in the PT were influenced by the balance of the Force.

Since I am currently sworn off the EU, and couldn't give a damn what the Plagueis novel says any more, I guess I just have to answer this for the sake of the existing argument.

Neither merging with the Force, nor influencing the balance of the Force is equal to deriving your power directly from the state of that balance. If darksiders and lightsiders had been clearly shown to be overall weakened or strengthened because of the imbalance, rather than simply suggesting it is all a matter of individuals the way things are now, then we could have talked. If the Jedi had not merely been stunted precognitively, and if that had even been followed up on in practice when they tried to deflect blaster bolts, then we could have talked. But as it stands, the Overlords growing or waning in power according to the state of things in the normal galaxy, with direct confrontation to demonstrate it, is really quite unique all on its own.

There is also the other matters which you are conveniently ignoring, such as the Overlords' unprecedented powers even versus Jedi Masters and Chosen Ones. And the whole ritual where Ani in his religious role of Chosen One grew temporarily stronger than them. You have to include it all rather than cherrypicking if you still have any hope of arguing against these figures being intended as special Force divinities._________________I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.

Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:03 pm

Message

Arawn_FennKnight

Joined: 07 Apr 2011Posts: 239Location: Damn you Shonda Rhimes!!!

DarthMRN wrote:

Why? You can't just say this with no further elaboration.

Exceptions are a slippery slope in this context. Is a hierarchy with "exceptions" really a hierarchy? And once again we are left to wonder why there are no specifics fleshing out the supposed exception.

DarthMRN wrote:

They were released prior to Holocron testing, and presumably deemed less serious and worse integrated than the reference material and adult novels that were retained in spite of their age. I also assume there was an economic concern involved, since newer comic series and such were deemed continuity while older weren't. It wouldn't do to decanonize current sellers, even if the logic used on older works applied to them too.

About what one would expect, in other words.

That's not what I was getting at. I was thinking of someone who wasn't involved in them.

DarthMRN wrote:

What that means is that almost everything contained in that novel, or any movie novel for that matter, which is different from the movies they elaborate on, are S-canon.

How can something be "different from the movies" without contradicting the movies? This is not consistent with the meaning of S-canon. If the content is not contradicted by the movies, it should be no less than C. Unless "Simon" didn't say, that is.

DarthMRN wrote:

But that doesn't mean Leland doesn't check over things before release and makes small edits where he can.

And it doesn't mean he does, generally speaking.

DarthMRN wrote:

It just means he doesn't have the power to hold back a product even if it is in violation. That would cost money

Why would it be "in violation" after he had already worked his editing magic on it? Is he that bad? It only costs money if the product has already been printed, meaning after the editing process is already over. Getting to look at a book after it's too late to do anything about it, and thus not being able to do anything about it, hardly constitutes "editing". By this logic we're all editing the books.

DarthMRN wrote:

...and still it was miles above anything that came before.

While, partly by your own admission, failing to be useful or coherent. ( For example, the various authors don't even agree on how many sides of the Force there are, and Leland has done precisely nothing about that. ) IMO that makes it difficult to call it a great improvement.

DarthMRN wrote:

And since we are discussing its canonicity right now, I expect I also said I found the source to be unreliable to begin with so YMMV.

Like I said, getting rid of Lucas. Any so-called "canon" which considers Lucas "unreliable" is not really canon at all, if the statements which have emphasized Lucas' relation to canon are any indication.

DarthMRN wrote:

Given GL's filmmaking skills, I guess it would be unreasonable to expect his intention to be reflected in the work. All I can say is that is "should" have been.

I showed how it was reflected in the work. However, you're acting as if Lucas was supposed to teleport into the film and make the claim verbally to the audience.

DarthMRN wrote:

And yeah, Yoda has every rational reason to be better.

Only if you continue to assume that he must be stronger in the Force.

DarthMRN wrote:

So why indeed would Lucas let Palp even have a fighting chance in the movie? I guess because SW is supposed to be mindless pulp driven by the rule of cool and rule of drama. Realism can get stuffed.

GL, the one person in the Lucas empire with power to disregard the EU however he pleased, saying he is signing off for good.

And this has happened before. Right in the middle of the glorious ten years in which manna rained down from heaven. So this time should only be as significant as the last time.

DarthMRN wrote:

If darksiders and lightsiders had been clearly shown to be overall weakened or strengthened because of the imbalance, rather than simply suggesting it is all a matter of individuals the way things are now, then we could have talked.

As you know, the Jedi were said to be weakened in general.

DarthMRN wrote:

If the Jedi had not merely been stunted precognitively, and if that had even been followed up on in practice when they tried to deflect blaster bolts, then we could have talked.

So you're admitting that there's an effect which applies generally, but now it simply doesn't go far enough. By the way, when did we see this kind of thing happen to the Force Wielders? What Force powers did they fail to accomplish?

DarthMRN wrote:

But as it stands, the Overlords growing or waning in power according to the state of things in the normal galaxy, with direct confrontation to demonstrate it, is really quite unique all on its own.

Not really. It stands to reason that if a creature derives its power from the dark side, and the dark side grows stronger, then the creature in question should grow stronger in turn. There is Bane, who proposed that the dark side itself was diluted and that his ability to withstand the poison had become weaker as a result. Meanwhile, LOE and the ROTS novel had linked the strength of the dark side with the state of things.

But in any case this is why the Jedi Order has descended into decadence and is dragging the Republic down with it. Because the Jedi have lost the allegiance of the Force. Yes, their ability to draw energy from the Force continues, but their ability to use the Force has diminished. Each of their actions engenders an opposite, often unrecognized consequence that elevates those attuned to the dark side; that buoys the efforts of the Sith and increases our power. - Darth Plagueis

And as I recall the Father's power was waning for an entirely different reason.

DarthMRN wrote:

There is also the other matters which you are conveniently ignoring, such as the Overlords' unprecedented powers even versus Jedi Masters and Chosen Ones.

Actually, I did mention that. But as I was saying it becomes only a question of degree or scale.

DarthMRN wrote:

Ani in his religious role of Chosen One

I don't have to include any such "religious role", because you made it up. The whole "special Force divinities" thing was invented by you. That doesn't make it something I have to argue against, especially in light of the fact that EU material seems to tell a different story. And what is your basis for claiming that the Wielders were "intended" that way? Have you found a statement of intent from the writers?_________________Hir yw'r dydd a hir yw'r nos, a hir yw aros Arawn.

Posted: Mon May 13, 2013 3:24 pm

Message

DarthMRNKnight

Joined: 20 Jul 2011Posts: 331

Arawn_Fenn wrote:

How can something be "different from the movies" without contradicting the movies? This is not consistent with the meaning of S-canon. If the content is not contradicted by the movies, it should be no less than C. Unless "Simon" didn't say, that is.

That is easily answered. Different doesn't mean contradictory. Say additions and elaborations, such as Anakin's dream in the TPM novel. Or lines of dialogue that take place between scene breaks, permitting them to exist without contradicting the movie. These are different in sum from the movies, but exist as additions to them.

The likely reason they would not be C-canon is this:

Leland Chee wrote:

But I assume the honorable mentions remain non-canon--or at best ambiguously canon along the same lines as, say, the Polyhedron material.
What makes something part of continuity is approval by Lucasfilm/Lucas Licensing. So it doesn't make a difference whether it was a winner or an honorable mention, they're all going to be treated equally as far as the Holocron is concerned. With regard to the Polyhedron material, if we're talking about the material created after 2003, then yes, it is considered part of continuity, because it went through Licensing for approval. I don't know of the Polyhedron material from 90's being approved by Licensing, so I can't include it as part of continuity in the Holocron.

As movie novelizations, based on GL's scripts and approved by him, there is no reason to think they went through Licensing approvals. Just like Leland has no say towards what goes into TCW. Which basically means GL gave someone besides himself authority to overlook the EU at will, without that person being GL. Only for GL's revisions and constantly evolving "vision" to render this version obsolete before long. Leaving Leland to categorize a novel that doesn't conform to neither the EU nor the Lucasverse. And as said here:

Chay Lelando wrote:

Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?
In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films.

For starters, how canon would something in the novelization be, even if contradicted by the films (IE: Mace says Palpatine was too strong for him in the Force, when no line is in the movie)?
As a line of dialogue in the novel but not in the film in a single scene, then it wouldn't be continuity. Authors are given more leeway with dialogue than you'd expect. If it's just narrative, or someone's thoughts, or could fit in a scene between scenes, then it could certainly be valid.

Wouldn't the fact that the novels contradict the movies on so many different occasions render them invalid?
Are you talking the novels as a whole? No. Contradictions are always dealt with case-by-case.

Since the Holocron tracks by entries, the first claim that most things created by the author is C holds up. Individual elements by them, characters, objects and such become C-canon normally. Which is pretty generous considering the lack of approvals, but likely owes to the GL approvals. Then the second quote says narrative, thoughts and in-between scenes content *could* be valid. *Could* means neither non-continuity nor C-canon. It is a description fitting only S-canon. There are no levels between levels in the Holocron, everything fits somewhere. Ergo, while new character X wielding new weapon X are C-canon, the narrative of their exploits outside the movie are optional.

Quote three simply cements that the content of these novels are not uniformly considered this or that canon level. They are a potpurri of different things. Cause that is how the Holocron tracks stuff, entry by entry, element by element.

Quote:

Exceptions are a slippery slope in this context. Is a hierarchy with "exceptions" really a hierarchy? And once again we are left to wonder why there are no specifics fleshing out the supposed exception.

Since we seem to be in agreement about what quotes are in question here, exceptions are perfectly valid. Rostoni says Licensing follows GL's lead. That is a generality. But as I'm sure you remember...

HolocronKeeper wrote:

And all G level would mean GL himself checks over it right?
G-level canon has nothing to do with GL checking over anything. It's anything that can be taken from the films or internal notes from him which can come from discussions, early drafts, or comments on GL-approved text.

The G/C/S-level canon stuff is a construct specifically for the Holocron. Non-Holocron users would have no idea what this stuff even means and I would say most of the people who use the Holocron don't use the field, instead looking specifically to the source of the material. Individual entries are not broken down by canon level.

This is how I use it:

- We need a list of characters from the films. I'll do a search of characters by G-canon.
- We need a list of some planets from the films and the EU. I'll do a search for planets sorted by canon to determine which ones are going to recognized by more people.
- Source A contradicts Source B. More likely than not, if Source A is from the films and Source B is from the EU, we'll use Source A. Of course, there can always be exceptions which is why the case-by-case determination is always in effect no matter what the Sources.

...there are exceptions to this generality. But that doesn't mean Leland doesn't go out of his way to follow GL's lead. Remember TCW Greedo being The Younger simply because that was GL intent? Leland could easily have gone with the EU retcon and said it was The Elder, but GL's intent held stronger sway, even though it wouldn't have mattered in practice. That reflects a general desire to accomodate the GL vision of SW. You originally cited Rostoni's quote as proof that everything GL said or thought was defining for the EU. But in reality it must be interpreted as merely a general desire to accomodate him, per this additional evidence.

As for hierarchies being the same as absolutes, I have no idea why you think that would be the case. Look the damn word up. A hierarchy reflects an uneven distribution of power, some things or people being more powerful or influential than others. What it does not denote, is that some things have absolute authority over others, to the point where there can be no exceptions to their superiority. You are using a definition of the word hierarchy not fitting anything I have ever heard of.

Now lay the issue to rest.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

DarthMRN wrote:

Anything whose continuity was in question was initially designated as S-continuity, including the Marvel comics, the WEG RPG, junior novels, video games, the newspaper strip comics

Now what do all of these things have in common, I wonder?

They were released prior to Holocron testing, and presumably deemed less serious and worse integrated than the reference material and adult novels that were retained in spite of their age. I also assume there was an economic concern involved, since newer comic series and such were deemed continuity while older weren't. It wouldn't do to decanonize current sellers, even if the logic used on older works applied to them too.

About what one would expect, in other words.

That's not what I was getting at. I was thinking of someone who wasn't involved in them.

Look over the line of discussion you are replying to. You are not making sense, I'm afraid.

Quote:

DarthMRN wrote:

But that doesn't mean Leland doesn't check over things before release and makes small edits where he can.

And it doesn't mean he does, generally speaking.

Dude, I literally quoted him saying he does in the very post you are replying to. What the kriff? Be serious, or I will cut you off yet again. Here:

Guess who wrote:

How much of the continuity do you write or rewrite?
Authors and editors often ask for suggestions on an existing planet, species, or character to use or to see what can and can't be done with a certain character. When going through approvals, I'll make small changes as necessary to make things fits within continuity. I'm often asked to be involved in the early concept discussions for new stories. When continuity conflicts arise, I may make note of the issue in Holocron and come up with a couple of potential explanations which may or may not be considered in the future. Sometimes we'll create names as needed. Beyond that, we leave the actual writing to the authors.

Quote:

Why would it be "in violation" after he had already worked his editing magic on it? Is he that bad? It only costs money if the product has already been printed, meaning after the editing process is already over. Getting to look at a book after it's too late to do anything about it, and thus not being able to do anything about it, hardly constitutes "editing". By this logic we're all editing the books.

I have no idea how often your average book is given an edit by its editors. But in a SW context, with what is apparently only a small number of editors covering a large amount of products, approval of the initial idea, and a few rough runthroughs throughout production doesn't sound unlikely. I agree that I wish it was better, though.

As for Leland's editing magic, I think it is naive to think anything can be fixed after the fact. If an entire storyline has already been crafted revolving around the Chiss and their unique circumstances, only for Leland to receive the final draft and realize that the Chiss were still unknown in the galaxy at that point, there is no editing in the world that can fix this without sending the entire story back to the author for a rewrite. Naturally, such a thing would ideally be caught in the initial approval, but it serves as an example of something that can't be easily fixed without a cash loss, explaining why it would just be allowed to pass, with an intent to have it retconned later.

Incidentally, this is my explanation for why the Chiss have been retroactively introduced into the GFFA ahead of proper chronology. But that is another issue.

Quote:

While, partly by your own admission, failing to be useful or coherent. ( For example, the various authors don't even agree on how many sides of the Force there are, and Leland has done precisely nothing about that. ) IMO that makes it difficult to call it a great improvement.

A valid enough position, that I can hardly contest, having sworn off the EU. But for the most part I view it the other way around, "How crappy are all other kinds of continuity by comparison then?" Any value judgment depends on comparison with something. So even something objectively crap can be great if it's closest competitor is even worse.

Quote:

Like I said, getting rid of Lucas. Any so-called "canon" which considers Lucas "unreliable" is not really canon at all, if the statements which have emphasized Lucas' relation to canon are any indication.

This, however, is pure idol worship. Personally, I don't think the quality of a continuity should be evaluated solely on whether it takes initiative to conform to the inconsistent whims of the original creator. Not when that creator could at any time have picked up the phone and ordered Licensing to do just that, had such been in his interest. That in fact sounds to me like the opposite of continuity, which implies consistency over time.

Perfect continuity in DarthMRN's ideal world would have minimized Lucas' influence even more, since his whims are nothing but disruptive towards the existing, hard-won cohesion. And then it would have taken as much time as was neccessary to fix every error in every product before release. The way I once thought it worked, back when I thought the Wook overlords had a clue.

Quote:

I showed how it was reflected in the work. However, you're acting as if Lucas was supposed to teleport into the film and make the claim verbally to the audience.

What did I say about your rethorical tricks, eh? You need to post this quote where Lucas says Yoda was intended to be stronger before you can claim having shown anything of the sort.

Quote:

DarthMRN wrote:

So why indeed would Lucas let Palp even have a fighting chance in the movie? I guess because SW is supposed to be mindless pulp driven by the rule of cool and rule of drama. Realism can get stuffed.

As I told you before, cart before horse. I am not required to prove a negative. You are required to prove a positive. The negative is the default.

Any work of fiction has a basis in reality. If it deviates from reality, it needs to make that part of its narrative somehow. It needs to explain to the audience that there is a difference, else they will have to assume it conforms to the reality they are used to. When storytellers don't do this, we call it rule of cool or drama or similar, reflecting that he or she didn't consider such elaboration necessary, or because it was implicit in the tradition of the genre in question, and we should just suspend our disbelief.

If we are supposed to think a normal lifespan human is stronger than a 900 year old alien, when both have been established as below the potential of the Chosen One, thus limiting their maximum difference, and this for credible IU reasons rather than mere rule of cool, then the movie needs to tell us how this can be. It doesn't. And since the real world tells us more experience and training makes a huge difference, let alone centuries thereof, we have ample reason to think Yoda should have been stronger. When he isn't, rule of cool justified by the desire for a spiffy lightsaber fight, is the next rational step. And that fits perfectly with the mindless childrens' pulp SW was inspired by, adding even more weight to it.

I don't even know why I have to tell you this. You have a better grasp of GL behind the scenes stuff than I do. If *I* have seen GL tell his animators to change stuff simply because it will be fun or cool, you definitely have.

Quote:

DarthMRN wrote:

GL, the one person in the Lucas empire with power to disregard the EU however he pleased, saying he is signing off for good.

And this has happened before. Right in the middle of the glorious ten years in which manna rained down from heaven. So this time should only be as significant as the last time.

Then I'm no longer following. The middle of those ten years would have been 2005, the year RotS was released. If he said so after it, which I seem to recall, then that would be the exact reason these were the great ten years. The previous five were good because the Holocron was running, and took steps to minimize the difficulties between the movies and the EU.

So I don't understand why the significance is so hard to get. It might have been implied before, but the first time GL promised to sign off after RotS, was also after the Holocron was in place. For the first time, that gave promise of our best continuity ever, coinciding with the alleged retirement of the one potential wrench that might fall into the machine. That particular alignment of stars had not occurred before AFAIK. And it gave a genuine hope for the future of SW continuity, which is what you are currently contesting the validity of.

I mean, seriously. Had TCW been released in the Marvel era, it wouldn't have made nearly the ripples it has in fandom today, for the simple reason that back then things were messy and incoherent as a rule. The only reason the TCW troubles have been significant, is because we currently have the Holocron to tackle EU continuity, and the oversights the series has comitted are way worse than anything the EU has done the last 13 years. The Holocron swept in, cleaned house with the old EU, and made sure the Prequels were left mostly alone. That is why we ever had the continuity illusion we did in the first place. Afterwards we were promised that GL would retire, which meant things would be even more airtight. And then TCW landed, hijacked by GL from being an EU-friendly series, to becoming his vision for the Clone Wars. The EU Clone Wars having already been set in stone, there was nothing Leland could do this time around, and we saw continuity burn!

So you ask what was different about Lucas' retirement plans during the Holocron era: TCW and its backlash provides the answer!

Quote:

As you know, the Jedi were said to be weakened in general.

Their ability to spy the future. I don't recall anyhing else from the Lucasverse. And even if the intent had been a general weakening, it was once again not reflected in the material.

Quote:

So you're admitting that there's an effect which applies generally, but now it simply doesn't go far enough. By the way, when did we see this kind of thing happen to the Force Wielders? What Force powers did they fail to accomplish?

Stop trying to construct some sort of redaction on my part when I already said they were stunted in the very limited capacity of seeing the distant future -while still being perfectly able to see the *near* future. You are the one arguing that this compares to what happened to the Overlords.
The Overlords did not fail any Force powers. You are the one trying to make an analogue between the OJO Jedi and them, not me. What we were told by Father, was that he and Daughter had been weakened. It was demonstrated by Son managing to defeat them both in combat. It was the very premise of the plot of those episodes. And while, per your interpretation, it might all have served as some massive metaphor, the concrete events of those episodes, and the motivations and actions of its characters, cannot therefore be overlooked as not having happened. That is a cop-out you can subscribe to all you want, but I sure as hell won't accept it.

Quote:

Not really. It stands to reason that if a creature derives its power from the dark side, and the dark side grows stronger, then the creature in question should grow stronger in turn.

This is a localized effect, though, not a galaxy-wide one. And it is very limited, given that the Jedi always manage to beat down their buffed enemies in these locations, presumably through superior personal qualities, as I mentioned. By contrast, the Overlords won or lost solely on basis of this effect.

Quote:

There is Bane, who proposed that the dark side itself was diluted and that his ability to withstand the poison had become weaker as a result.

This old philosophy never saw corroboration, clashes with everything else in the EU, and is better interpreted as a metaphor for the potential of a Sith who doesn't have to worry about infighting, rather than a genuine metaphysical phenomenon. So I consider it a soundly falsified theory on the part of JvS' creators -and by extension, Bane. In any case, the dark side being a finite generator tapped to weakness by too many appliances is not the same as this one appliance deriving its power from the current size of that generator.
Bane's JvS theory never mentions anything beyond the dark side being finite. He never says it can fluctuate, which is a requirement for the last darksider to gain anything from a dark side change. And that's not even mentioning that Bane also thinks each darksider has an upper limit, returning the issue to individual qualities, rather than power being solely a function of dark side strength, as it apparently is with the divine Son.

Hell, the JvS darkside theory runs contrary to Mortis, since it would mean the same Sith that strengthened the dark side, would have robbed Son of his power to fuel theirs. The only way Bane would line up with Mortis, would be if Son was the sole darksider left in the galaxy. Which, as you like to remind me, would per GL have brought balance to the Force, not given the dark side the upper hand.

Quote:

Meanwhile, LOE and the ROTS novel had linked the strength of the dark side with the state of things.

This is not the same either. This is good old destiny-kriff. The same thing Zayne Carrick suffered from. Presumably the same thing that set the conception of the Chosen One into motion. The state of things, the Force included, causes events to unfold in a destiny-like manner. Ostensibly for the sake of balance. You are citing proof talking about the mechanics of the universe itself, and comparing it to the qualities of individual characters. To whatever extent this comparison matters, it just supports the Overlords as Force divinities, because destiny-manipulation definitely has a divine sheen to it. The closest that brings you is Zayne being more or less divine, which considering the uniqueness of his powers, isn't unreasonable. He still isn't anything like the Overlords, though.

I mean, come on. You are seriously going to argue that the destiny of the GFFA changing in response to the balance of the Force, is somehow an analogue to the Overlords' powers shifting as a result of the same mechanism? That this is an example of them not being unique and divine?!

Quote:

I don't have to include any such "religious role", because you made it up. The whole "special Force divinities" thing was invented by you. That doesn't make it something I have to argue against, especially in light of the fact that EU material seems to tell a different story. And what is your basis for claiming that the Wielders were "intended" that way? Have you found a statement of intent from the writers?

More rethorics. Worse, you have elevated to the level of sophistry.
Sorry, you don't get to pull a discussion of whose interpretation of the Mortis trilogy is better, back to a matter of evidence. We are past that. If there was a clear official answer to this, we wouldn't be discussing it. You have no more explicit evidence for your position than I do mine. And frankly, retreating back to basics rather than trying to show how your interpretation is superior, just suggests that you can't.

I have told you why I think the Overlords seem intended as divinities. You have yet to counter it beyond saying it should be overlooked so your precious Saga metaphor will work._________________I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:01 pm

Message

Arawn_FennKnight

Joined: 07 Apr 2011Posts: 239Location: Damn you Shonda Rhimes!!!

DarthMRN wrote:

Different doesn't mean contradictory. Say additions and elaborations, such as Anakin's dream in the TPM novel. Or lines of dialogue that take place between scene breaks, permitting them to exist without contradicting the movie. These are different in sum from the movies, but exist as additions to them.

And the point is that there is no basis whatsoever for treating such things as "S-canon". That does not fit the meaning of S-canon as understood by pretty much everyone except you. Seriously, take that at face value. I know, I know - you're right and everyone else is wrong, right?

DarthMRN wrote:

The likely reason they would not be C-canon is this:

Leland Chee wrote:

But I assume the honorable mentions remain non-canon--or at best ambiguously canon along the same lines as, say, the Polyhedron material.
What makes something part of continuity is approval by Lucasfilm/Lucas Licensing. So it doesn't make a difference whether it was a winner or an honorable mention, they're all going to be treated equally as far as the Holocron is concerned. With regard to the Polyhedron material, if we're talking about the material created after 2003, then yes, it is considered part of continuity, because it went through Licensing for approval. I don't know of the Polyhedron material from 90's being approved by Licensing, so I can't include it as part of continuity in the Holocron.

As movie novelizations, based on GL's scripts and approved by him, there is no reason to think they went through Licensing approvals.

That is nonsense. There is no legitimate comparison between the Polyhedron situation and official novelizations.

Quote:

In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level.

Right here your position is being contradicted, and for some reason you're not acknowledging it.

Quote:

Contradictions are always dealt with case-by-case.

Which leaves no room for any of it to be "S-canon". If things created by the author are C-canon when they do not contradict the film, and N-canon otherwise, where does S come in? What things in the text are not created by the author?

DarthMRN wrote:

Look the damn word up. A hierarchy reflects an uneven distribution of power, some things or people being more powerful or influential than others.

Not the way you envision it. There are exceptions, remember? And, as we've seen, this assumption of "exceptions" will be used to justify just about anything. So the supposed hierarchy is not actually in effect in practice.

Is paying lip service to the idea of a hierarchy actually the same thing as a real hierarchy? Keep in mind that Rostoni spoke of no such exceptions, while having every opportunity to do so.

DarthMRN wrote:

You are not making sense, I'm afraid.

The someone I referred to was Lucas, if that helps.

DarthMRN wrote:

Dude, I literally quoted him saying he does in the very post you are replying to.

What do you think "generally speaking" means? In the case of the vast majority of EU product it cannot be assumed that Leland had any influence over it at all.

DarthMRN wrote:

I will cut you off yet again.

No, I don't believe you. You've said that before, yet here you are. A reference to a briar patch seems in order.

DarthMRN wrote:

This, however, is pure idol worship.

Despite what you might think, Sue Rostoni is no idol of mine. I can find posts proving that, if I look hard enough.

DarthMRN wrote:

Personally, I don't think the quality of a continuity should be evaluated solely on whether it takes initiative to conform to the inconsistent whims of the original creator.

What about those plot points about which he has been 100% consistent? How difficult would it be to "conform" in a situation like that? How much "initiative" would it take?

DarthMRN wrote:

You need to post this quote where Lucas says Yoda was intended to be stronger before you can claim having shown anything of the sort.

You seem to be getting severly confused here. It has not been my contention that Yoda was intended to be stronger, so I would not be trying to claim having shown any such thing. You claimed Yoda is "canonically" more powerful than Palpatine. There's another one of those "positives" which you've been unable to prove, because canon does not say that. My contention was that Palpatine was stronger, and that Lucas was alleged to have said so. Then you go on to say "If he figured Yoda to be more powerful, shouldn't he have reflected that in the movie somehow?", as if not realizing that this argues against your own position. Somehow you are now arguing against yourself quite effectively: you need to post this quote where Lucas says Yoda was intended to be stronger before you can claim having shown anything of the sort. I couldn't have said it better myself.

"What did I say about your rhetorical tricks, eh?" Priceless.

DarthMRN wrote:

As I told you before, cart before horse. I am not required to prove a negative. You are required to prove a positive. The negative is the default.

Now apply that thinking to your "rule of cool" assumption and see what happens. The negative is the default, remember?

DarthMRN wrote:

when both have been established as below the potential of the Chosen One

Really? When did that happen?

DarthMRN wrote:

When he isn't, rule of cool justified by the desire for a spiffy lightsaber fight, is the next rational step.

You might be overlooking a few options there.

DarthMRN wrote:

If *I* have seen GL tell his animators to change stuff simply because it will be fun or cool, you definitely have.

Which does not somehow mean that it happens whenever you say it does. Logic, right? You have to prove it, remember? I've seen footage of George Lucas talking. Does that mean he can be assumed to be talking even when we don't see his lips moving?

DarthMRN wrote:

but the first time GL promised to sign off after RotS, was also after the Holocron was in place.

Just like this time. Nothing new.

DarthMRN wrote:

So you ask what was different about Lucas' retirement plans during the Holocron era: TCW and its backlash provides the answer!

What backlash? All the people, including PT haters, drooling over the show and buying up the DVDs?

DarthMRN wrote:

This is a localized effect, though, not a galaxy-wide one.

No. The Force is galaxy-wide.

DarthMRN wrote:

This old philosophy never saw corroboration, clashes with everything else in the EU

False ( not to mention hyperbolic ).

DarthMRN wrote:

and is better interpreted as a metaphor for the potential of a Sith who doesn't have to worry about infighting, rather than a genuine metaphysical phenomenon.

Sorry, that doesn't work. You may need to revisit the specifics of how it affected Bane.

DarthMRN wrote:

So I consider it a soundly falsified theory on the part of JvS' creators -and by extension, Bane.

In other words, C-canon that gets in your way gets summarily thrown under the bus.

DarthMRN wrote:

Which, as you like to remind me, would per GL have brought balance to the Force, not given the dark side the upper hand.

Yet a fully unleashed Son would also have the potential to give the dark side the upper hand.

DarthMRN wrote:

To whatever extent this comparison matters, it just supports the Overlords as Force divinities, because destiny-manipulation definitely has a divine sheen to it. The closest that brings you is Zayne being more or less divine, which considering the uniqueness of his powers, isn't unreasonable.

You appear to think this "divinity" thing is a magic box giving you whatever you want. It still doesn't make much sense or find support anywhere.

DarthMRN wrote:

That this is an example of them not being unique and divine?!

Did someone say something about "proving a negative"? How do you intend to prove that the Force Wielders are "divine", whatever that means? There is nothing in the arc to imply such a thing; in fact, the arc implies otherwise in its tale of the Wielders reaching Mortis in the distant past. What kind of "divinities" require starships and can be killed off before a commercial break?

DarthMRN wrote:

Sorry, you don't get to pull a discussion of whose interpretation of the Mortis trilogy is better, back to a matter of evidence. We are past that.

Wrong.

You claimed that my position is in some way fundamentally flawed because it does not address the "divinities" thing which you made up, and for which you have no evidence. This is why you recoil above at the mere suggestion of an evidence-based argument. My position does not have to account for something which you invented and which is not supported by the material.

DarthMRN wrote:

And that's not even mentioning that Bane also thinks each darksider has an upper limit, returning the issue to individual qualities, rather than power being solely a function of dark side strength, as it apparently is with the divine Son.

You imply mutual exclusivity where it does not exist. Everyone having an upper limit can be consistent with power being a function of dark side strength._________________Hir yw'r dydd a hir yw'r nos, a hir yw aros Arawn.

Posted: Sat Jun 29, 2013 5:53 pm

Message

DarthMRNKnight

Joined: 20 Jul 2011Posts: 331

Rarely have I seen more cherrypicking, sophistry and backpedalling in a single post. You know, I try to reserve my time for people who are actually interested in the discussion, and more, in reaching an agreement if one can be had.

Arawn_Fenn wrote:

No, I don't believe you. You've said that before, yet here you are. A reference to a briar patch seems in order.

Then you have mixed up so many of our lines of argument that you failed to notice me ending a whole bunch of them whenever I have said that, keeping at it only on those points where you had earned an answer.
I guess that tends to happen when you are used to ignoring any of your opponents points that cannot be twisted or countered, huh? You assume your opponent does the same, so how could you notice the correlation with my threats of cutting you off?

I think that ends here, though. At least as far as this thread is concerned. I might be persuaded to answer your direct questions, if they are in fact things you genuinely wonder about, as opposed to rethorics. So, what will it be?_________________I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.

Were I less informed, I might have included Rostoni in that equation since she worked as an editor alongside him in the same company, under benefit of the doubt.

There is no great mystery here. You ignore Rostoni because Rostoni contradicted you. When you foolishly attempt to throw reality under the bus in such a fashion, this kind of thing will inevitably tend to happen. Let's not forget, your original excuse for ignoring her comments was that you assumed they were from before the creation of the all-powerful "Holocron" ( a position itself predicated on the knowingly false assumption that the Holocron represented a change in canon policy ). Then it was proved that she took the same position after the creation of the all-powerful Holocron. Since the old excuse doesn't work anymore, it's simply been discarded in favor of a new excuse, one which unsurprisingly resorts to attacking Rostoni.

DarthMRN wrote:

But I frequented her thread on the SW.com boards for a long time. Enough to discover that not only were her area of expertise different, related to covers, text editing, pschedules, contracts and the like, she also betrayed ignorance of bits and pieces of Holocron continuity Leland had revealed in the past.

So what? The point is that she spoke openly of the canon hierarchy, and after the all-important cutoff date you invented in the process of constructing this fictive reality in which you insist on dwelling. By what sleight of hand do you intend to magically convert ignorance of "bits and pieces" into a denigration of the canon hierarchy itself? And whatever happened to the famous "Leland edits the EU" stance?

DarthMRN wrote:

given how you think it is canon.

So its canonicity is now a matter of opinion? I thought there was a canon level system. Surely this system includes the book somewhere in one of its many levels?

DarthMRN wrote:

Palp beat Yoda who canonically is the more powerful.

Not according to Lucas. What kind of "canon" do you think you've invented here? Something which gets rid of Lucas entirely? Whatever that is, it isn't "canon".

DarthMRN wrote:

Rendering that continuity an illusion, only marginally valid until a new film comes along to violate it, bringing its own host of EU tie-ins with it.

Read that again. Until a new film comes along to violate it. Sound familiar? We've been there before. Why is this time any different?

DarthMRN wrote:

Post-Holocon we had ten glorious years where the EU actually needed to be coherent, where old material got to constrain the new.

Except when it didn't. Over in the real world, in most cases the authors did pretty much what they wanted. During this epic period, this fictional Golden Age, it was commonplace to find books contradicting one another on a variety of plot points, including such small matters as the fundamental structure of the universe.

DarthMRN wrote:

We had reason to believe in the continuity illusion.

That's all this story is. Illusion. Fantasy. Trickery. Not anything which really happened.

DarthMRN wrote:

Overlords are new and different...within SW, as if you didn't know that.

Just because something is new doesn't necessarily make it "different" in a meaningful sense. In terms of the characterization of the Son and the implied threat to the normal galaxy, the Son is not fundamentally different from any unusually powerful Sith we might encounter. Perhaps there could be a question of degree of power levels, but since we haven't seen Wielders operating outside of Mortis even that much is not clear. And given that the Wielders have been alleged to be ascended Celestials in FOTJ, they are really not as "new" as some might want to think. There is certainly no indication of "divinity", in the true sense of the term, either in the episodes themselves or in EU references. Unless we're saying that any beings who have merged with the Force, such as Force ghosts, are also "divinities". The Celestials do not seem to be, from what we know about them. And the backstory told by the Father creates a different impression entirely.

keep it light. some personal observations of your at MRN border trollish behavior.

that is all._________________-Bring on your thousands, one at a time or all in a rush. I don't give a damn. None shall pass.
-
-To become a Jedi, it is not the Force one must learn to control but oneself.
-
-Podcasts: Star Wars Beyond the Films, The Star Wars Report, & EUCast